I am in utter disbelief that this 'Flat-Earth' nonsense has gained some attention

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
You guys are saying that these Go Pro's don't have fish eye lenses?

GoPro's offer good bang for the buck. If you don't like them, feel free to pick what ever recording device you wish, just make sure that you get a HAB rated for the payload you are sending.

That aside, by checking at multiple points of the video, it would be quite simple to determine how much curvature is from the Earth and how much is from the lens, at the given altitude.

a reply to: NNN87
I have done simple experiments...sipping mojitos while watching ships vanish behind the horizon.
2nd.

a reply to: peck420

GoPro's offer good bang for the buck. If you don't like them, feel free to pick what ever recording device you wish, just make sure that you get a HAB rated for the payload you are sending.

I wasn't asking for advice though.

That aside,

The unrelated part you mean?

by checking at multiple points of the video, it would be quite simple to determine how much curvature is from the Earth and how much is from the lens, at the given altitude.

Ah, so the lense is in fact causing curvature? But not all of it?

So what is causing the absence of curvature in all the high altitude vids using normal lenses?

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
You guys are saying that these Go Pro's don't have fish eye lenses?

GoPro's offer good bang for the buck. If you don't like them, feel free to pick what ever recording device you wish, just make sure that you get a HAB rated for the payload you are sending.

That aside, by checking at multiple points of the video, it would be quite simple to determine how much curvature is from the Earth and how much is from the lens, at the given altitude.

Whay about using your own eyes? And a couple of binoculars? No curvature to be seen, and i have been on mountains and looked over oceans, its all perspective, which was completely ignored in the original calculations for earth.

Just thought of something, the calculations using shadows gave some observers the idea of the diameter of our earth, but the same equation could be used on a flat surfaceto determine the distance of the sun.

The calculations only showed half the diameter, roughly around 6.3 thousand kilometers, using the same calculations but knowing that the original curvature observations are wrong, the sun would be at the distance of 6.3 thousand, and much smaller.

I would try this.experiment one day, but one needs summer now, looong wait.

a reply to: peck420

That is not a direct observation of the actual curvature line, which we were talking about.

I'm officially out of the flat earth threads. As funny as they are, I just can't be bothered speaking to the uneducated. I'm sure it makes my intelligence level drop each time.

See ya flat earthers!

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
Ah, so the lense is in fact causing curvature? But not all of it?

So what is causing the absence of curvature in all the high altitude vids using normal lenses?

All lens will cause some form of distortion. You can account for it, or discount because of it. I don't really care either way.

a reply to: NNN87

Write a hypothesis, test it to at least a theory, unify it with what we observe from other celestial bodies, and get back to us.

a reply to: TerryDon79

I'm officially out of the flat earth threads. As funny as they are, I just can't be bothered speaking to the uneducated. I'm sure it makes my intelligence level drop each time.

You are going to run out.

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
That is not a direct observation of the actual curvature line, which we were talking about.

Save up a million or so, and head to Russia. Ride a rocket, see it for yourself, if you don't trust recording devices, and must see it with your own eyes.

Edit to add:

If you don't feel like saving up a million or more, you can catch a ride on a MiG to the edge of space for a much more reasonable price.

Prices of MiG-29 Flights

a reply to: peck420

All lens will cause some form of distortion. You can account for it, or discount because of it.

Normal lenses don't make curved lines look straight.

Fish eye lenses do make straight lines look curved......

I don't really care either way.

If you don't care you shouldn't talk. Great argument.

a reply to: peck420

Again, I wasn't asking you for advice, I was pointing something out to you.

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
Normal lenses don't make curved lines look straight.
Fish eye lenses do make straight lines look curved......

All lens have some distortion, including the lenses in our heads (eyes).
2nd.

originally posted by: peck420
a reply to: NNN87

Write a hypothesis, test it to at least a theory, unify it with what we observe from other celestial bodies, and get back to us.

But we don't need that, or theories, there are observable facts.

Just go to ma beach on a clear day, wait for a boat to disappear due to ''curvature'' and theb locate said boat with binoculars, you will see it and a horizon beyond it, this world is a lot bigger then we are told, and much more important then some distant light in the sky.

You people do realize that we and only we pay for all this nonsense, the tax payers, the soldiers and government workers pay to be told where we live, where we came from and who we are, and they be lying about it. When it comes down to natural observable research and science their whole globe idea falls apart.

Seriously, time to wake up, WAKE UP!!

These people have literally taken everything spiritual, natural and observable and turned it into a consumer based thought process, materialistic religions have come about not to long ago, destroying the fundamentals of a community.

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
Again, I wasn't asking you for advice, I was pointing something out to you.

No you weren't. You are just trying to figure out how to ignore anything that is counter to your predetermined outcome.

So, straight up, prove the accepted model is wrong. Show us some math that accepts a flat Earth and the observed (both by lens and by eye) celestial bodies.

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
Normal lenses don't make curved lines look straight.
Fish eye lenses do make straight lines look curved......

All lens have some distortion, including the lenses in our heads (eyes).
2nd.

If they do it is insignificant here. A normal camera lense does not make a curved line look straight in any significant way. Fishe eye lenses do make straight lines look curved in a significant way. There really is no debate here.

originally posted by: NNN87
But we don't need that, or theories, there are observable facts.

Than you should have very little difficulty showing the math that works for both a flat Earth and the observed path of the Sun and Moon. And make sure it works to physically place things on the Moon. The 'theory' that you are disputing has already done these things.

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
Again, I wasn't asking you for advice, I was pointing something out to you.

No you weren't. You are just trying to figure out how to ignore anything that is counter to your predetermined outcome.

So, straight up, prove the accepted model is wrong. Show us some math that accepts a flat Earth and the observed (both by lens and by eye) celestial bodies.

I want to know right meow, what in the world do celestial bodies have to do with the shape of our world? You only know them by what you were told of them by people who have never ever met anyone or them selfs have been to another planet.

You are using assumptions as a means to an end, just as does the globe model, so it makes sense, we are what we eat type of momentum.

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: NNN87
But we don't need that, or theories, there are observable facts.

Than you should have very little difficulty showing the math that works for both a flat Earth and the observed path of the Sun and Moon. And make sure it works to physically place things on the Moon. The 'theory' that you are disputing has already done these things.

The moon? I don't live on the moon, are you mad?

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
If they do it is insignificant here. A normal camera lense does not make a curved line look straight in any significant way. Fishe eye lenses do make straight lines look curved in a significant way. There really is no debate here.

Lens Basics

As long as the focal point, optical centre, and image sensor are not the same point, there is distortion.